Files
Atomizer/docs/STUDY_ORGANIZATION.md
Anto01 91e2d7a120 feat: Complete Phase 3.3 - Visualization & Model Cleanup System
Implemented automated post-processing capabilities for optimization workflows,
including publication-quality visualization and intelligent model cleanup to
manage disk space.

## New Features

### 1. Automated Visualization System (optimization_engine/visualizer.py)

**Capabilities**:
- 6 plot types: convergence, design space, parallel coordinates, sensitivity,
  constraints, objectives
- Publication-quality output: PNG (300 DPI) + PDF (vector graphics)
- Auto-generated plot summary statistics
- Configurable output formats

**Plot Types**:
- Convergence: Objective vs trial number with running best
- Design Space: Parameter evolution colored by performance
- Parallel Coordinates: High-dimensional visualization
- Sensitivity Heatmap: Parameter correlation analysis
- Constraint Violations: Track constraint satisfaction
- Objective Breakdown: Multi-objective contributions

**Usage**:
```bash
# Standalone
python optimization_engine/visualizer.py substudy_dir png pdf

# Automatic (via config)
"post_processing": {"generate_plots": true, "plot_formats": ["png", "pdf"]}
```

### 2. Model Cleanup System (optimization_engine/model_cleanup.py)

**Purpose**: Reduce disk usage by deleting large CAD/FEM files from non-optimal trials

**Strategy**:
- Keep top-N best trials (configurable, default: 10)
- Delete large files: .prt, .sim, .fem, .op2, .f06, .dat, .bdf
- Preserve ALL results.json files (small, critical data)
- Dry-run mode for safety

**Usage**:
```bash
# Standalone
python optimization_engine/model_cleanup.py substudy_dir --keep-top-n 10

# Dry run (preview)
python optimization_engine/model_cleanup.py substudy_dir --dry-run

# Automatic (via config)
"post_processing": {"cleanup_models": true, "keep_top_n_models": 10}
```

**Typical Savings**: 50-90% disk space reduction

### 3. History Reconstruction Tool (optimization_engine/generate_history_from_trials.py)

**Purpose**: Generate history.json from older substudy formats

**Usage**:
```bash
python optimization_engine/generate_history_from_trials.py substudy_dir
```

## Configuration Integration

### JSON Configuration Format (NEW: post_processing section)

```json
{
  "optimization_settings": { ... },
  "post_processing": {
    "generate_plots": true,
    "plot_formats": ["png", "pdf"],
    "cleanup_models": true,
    "keep_top_n_models": 10,
    "cleanup_dry_run": false
  }
}
```

### Runner Integration (optimization_engine/runner.py:656-716)

Post-processing runs automatically after optimization completes:
- Generates plots using OptimizationVisualizer
- Runs model cleanup using ModelCleanup
- Handles exceptions gracefully with warnings
- Prints post-processing summary

## Documentation

### docs/PHASE_3_3_VISUALIZATION_AND_CLEANUP.md
Complete feature documentation:
- Feature overview and capabilities
- Configuration guide
- Plot type descriptions with use cases
- Benefits and examples
- Troubleshooting section
- Future enhancements

### docs/OPTUNA_DASHBOARD.md
Optuna dashboard integration guide:
- Quick start instructions
- Real-time monitoring during optimization
- Comparison: Optuna dashboard vs Atomizer matplotlib
- Recommendation: Use both (Optuna for monitoring, Atomizer for reports)

### docs/STUDY_ORGANIZATION.md (NEW)
Study directory organization guide:
- Current organization analysis
- Recommended structure with numbered substudies
- Migration guide (reorganize existing or apply to future)
- Best practices for study/substudy/trial levels
- Naming conventions
- Metadata format recommendations

## Testing & Validation

**Tested on**: simple_beam_optimization/full_optimization_50trials (50 trials)

**Results**:
- Generated 6 plots × 2 formats = 12 files successfully
- Plots saved to: studies/.../substudies/full_optimization_50trials/plots/
- All plot types working correctly
- Unicode display issue fixed (replaced ✓ with "SUCCESS:")

**Example Output**:
```
POST-PROCESSING
===========================================================

Generating visualization plots...
  - Generating convergence plot...
  - Generating design space exploration...
  - Generating parallel coordinate plot...
  - Generating sensitivity heatmap...
  Plots generated: 2 format(s)
  Improvement: 23.1%
  Location: studies/.../plots

Cleaning up trial models...
  Deleted 320 files from 40 trials
  Space freed: 1542.3 MB
  Kept top 10 trial models
===========================================================
```

## Benefits

**Visualization**:
- Publication-ready plots without manual post-processing
- Automated generation after each optimization
- Comprehensive coverage (6 plot types)
- Embeddable in reports, papers, presentations

**Model Cleanup**:
- 50-90% disk space savings typical
- Selective retention (keeps best trials)
- Safe (preserves all critical data)
- Traceable (cleanup log documents deletions)

**Organization**:
- Clear study directory structure recommendations
- Chronological substudy numbering
- Self-documenting substudy system
- Scalable for small and large projects

## Files Modified

- optimization_engine/runner.py - Added _run_post_processing() method
- studies/simple_beam_optimization/beam_optimization_config.json - Added post_processing section
- studies/simple_beam_optimization/substudies/full_optimization_50trials/plots/ - Generated plots

## Files Added

- optimization_engine/visualizer.py - Visualization system
- optimization_engine/model_cleanup.py - Model cleanup system
- optimization_engine/generate_history_from_trials.py - History reconstruction
- docs/PHASE_3_3_VISUALIZATION_AND_CLEANUP.md - Complete documentation
- docs/OPTUNA_DASHBOARD.md - Optuna dashboard guide
- docs/STUDY_ORGANIZATION.md - Study organization guide

## Dependencies

**Required** (for visualization):
- matplotlib >= 3.10
- numpy < 2.0 (pyNastran compatibility)
- pandas >= 2.3

**Optional** (for real-time monitoring):
- optuna-dashboard

## Known Issues & Workarounds

**Issue**: atomizer environment has corrupted matplotlib/numpy dependencies
**Workaround**: Use test_env environment (has working dependencies)
**Long-term Fix**: Rebuild atomizer environment cleanly (pending)

**Issue**: Older substudies missing history.json
**Solution**: Use generate_history_from_trials.py to reconstruct

## Next Steps

**Immediate**:
1. Rebuild atomizer environment with clean dependencies
2. Test automated post-processing on new optimization run
3. Consider applying study organization recommendations to existing study

**Future Enhancements** (Phase 3.4):
- Interactive HTML plots (Plotly)
- Automated report generation (Markdown → PDF)
- Video animation of design evolution
- 3D scatter plots for high-dimensional spaces
- Statistical analysis (confidence intervals, significance tests)
- Multi-substudy comparison reports

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
2025-11-17 19:07:41 -05:00

519 lines
17 KiB
Markdown

# Study Organization Guide
**Date**: 2025-11-17
**Purpose**: Document recommended study directory structure and organization principles
---
## Current Organization Analysis
### Study Directory: `studies/simple_beam_optimization/`
**Current Structure**:
```
studies/simple_beam_optimization/
├── model/ # Base CAD/FEM model (reference)
│ ├── Beam.prt
│ ├── Beam_sim1.sim
│ ├── beam_sim1-solution_1.op2
│ ├── beam_sim1-solution_1.f06
│ └── comprehensive_results_analysis.json
├── substudies/ # All optimization runs
│ ├── benchmarking/
│ │ ├── benchmark_results.json
│ │ └── BENCHMARK_REPORT.md
│ ├── initial_exploration/
│ │ ├── config.json
│ │ └── optimization_config.json
│ ├── validation_3trials/
│ │ ├── trial_000/
│ │ ├── trial_001/
│ │ ├── trial_002/
│ │ ├── best_trial.json
│ │ └── optuna_study.pkl
│ ├── validation_4d_3trials/
│ │ └── [similar structure]
│ └── full_optimization_50trials/
│ ├── trial_000/
│ ├── ... trial_049/
│ ├── plots/ # NEW: Auto-generated plots
│ ├── history.json
│ ├── best_trial.json
│ └── optuna_study.pkl
├── README.md # Study overview
├── study_metadata.json # Study metadata
├── beam_optimization_config.json # Main configuration
├── baseline_validation.json # Baseline results
├── COMPREHENSIVE_BENCHMARK_RESULTS.md
├── OPTIMIZATION_RESULTS_50TRIALS.md
└── run_optimization.py # Study-specific runner
```
---
## Assessment
### ✅ What's Working Well
1. **Substudy Isolation**: Each optimization run (substudy) is self-contained with its own trial directories, making it easy to compare different optimization strategies.
2. **Centralized Model**: The `model/` directory serves as a reference CAD/FEM model, which all substudies copy from.
3. **Configuration at Study Level**: `beam_optimization_config.json` provides the main configuration that substudies inherit from.
4. **Study-Level Documentation**: `README.md` and results markdown files at the study level provide high-level overviews.
5. **Clear Hierarchy**:
- Study = Overall project (e.g., "optimize this beam")
- Substudy = Specific optimization run (e.g., "50 trials with TPE sampler")
- Trial = Individual design evaluation
### ⚠️ Issues Found
1. **Documentation Scattered**: Results documentation is at the study level (`OPTIMIZATION_RESULTS_50TRIALS.md`) but describes a specific substudy (`full_optimization_50trials`).
2. **Benchmarking Placement**: `substudies/benchmarking/` is not really a "substudy" - it's a validation step that should happen before optimization.
3. **Missing Substudy Metadata**: Some substudies lack their own README or summary files to explain what they tested.
4. **Inconsistent Naming**: `validation_3trials` vs `validation_4d_3trials` - unclear what distinguishes them without investigation.
5. **Study Metadata Incomplete**: `study_metadata.json` lists only "initial_exploration" substudy, but there are 5 substudies present.
---
## Recommended Organization
### Proposed Structure
```
studies/simple_beam_optimization/
├── 1_setup/ # NEW: Pre-optimization setup
│ ├── model/ # Reference CAD/FEM model
│ │ ├── Beam.prt
│ │ ├── Beam_sim1.sim
│ │ └── ...
│ ├── benchmarking/ # Baseline validation
│ │ ├── benchmark_results.json
│ │ └── BENCHMARK_REPORT.md
│ └── baseline_validation.json
├── 2_substudies/ # Optimization runs
│ ├── 01_initial_exploration/
│ │ ├── README.md # What was tested, why
│ │ ├── config.json
│ │ ├── trial_000/
│ │ ├── ...
│ │ └── results_summary.md # Substudy-specific results
│ ├── 02_validation_3d_3trials/
│ │ └── [similar structure]
│ ├── 03_validation_4d_3trials/
│ │ └── [similar structure]
│ └── 04_full_optimization_50trials/
│ ├── README.md
│ ├── trial_000/
│ ├── ... trial_049/
│ ├── plots/
│ ├── history.json
│ ├── best_trial.json
│ ├── OPTIMIZATION_RESULTS.md # Moved from study level
│ └── cleanup_log.json
├── 3_reports/ # NEW: Study-level analysis
│ ├── COMPREHENSIVE_BENCHMARK_RESULTS.md
│ ├── COMPARISON_ALL_SUBSTUDIES.md # NEW: Compare substudies
│ └── final_recommendations.md # NEW: Engineering insights
├── README.md # Study overview
├── study_metadata.json # Updated with all substudies
├── beam_optimization_config.json # Main configuration
└── run_optimization.py # Study-specific runner
```
### Key Changes
1. **Numbered Directories**: Indicate workflow sequence (setup → substudies → reports)
2. **Numbered Substudies**: Chronological naming (01_, 02_, 03_) makes progression clear
3. **Moved Benchmarking**: From `substudies/` to `1_setup/` (it's pre-optimization)
4. **Substudy-Level Documentation**: Each substudy has:
- `README.md` - What was tested, parameters, hypothesis
- `OPTIMIZATION_RESULTS.md` - Results and analysis
5. **Centralized Reports**: All comparative analysis and final recommendations in `3_reports/`
6. **Updated Metadata**: `study_metadata.json` tracks all substudies with status
---
## Comparison: Current vs Proposed
| Aspect | Current | Proposed | Benefit |
|--------|---------|----------|---------|
| **Substudy naming** | Descriptive only | Numbered + descriptive | Chronological clarity |
| **Documentation** | Mixed levels | Clear hierarchy | Easier to find results |
| **Benchmarking** | In substudies/ | In 1_setup/ | Reflects true purpose |
| **Model location** | study root | 1_setup/model/ | Grouped with setup |
| **Reports** | Study root | 3_reports/ | Centralized analysis |
| **Substudy docs** | Minimal | README + results | Self-documenting |
| **Metadata** | Incomplete | All substudies tracked | Accurate status |
---
## Migration Guide
### Option 1: Reorganize Existing Study (Recommended)
**Steps**:
1. Create new directory structure
2. Move files to new locations
3. Update `study_metadata.json`
4. Update file references in documentation
5. Create missing substudy READMEs
**Commands**:
```bash
# Create new structure
mkdir -p studies/simple_beam_optimization/1_setup/model
mkdir -p studies/simple_beam_optimization/1_setup/benchmarking
mkdir -p studies/simple_beam_optimization/2_substudies
mkdir -p studies/simple_beam_optimization/3_reports
# Move model
mv studies/simple_beam_optimization/model/* studies/simple_beam_optimization/1_setup/model/
# Move benchmarking
mv studies/simple_beam_optimization/substudies/benchmarking/* studies/simple_beam_optimization/1_setup/benchmarking/
# Rename and move substudies
mv studies/simple_beam_optimization/substudies/initial_exploration studies/simple_beam_optimization/2_substudies/01_initial_exploration
mv studies/simple_beam_optimization/substudies/validation_3trials studies/simple_beam_optimization/2_substudies/02_validation_3d_3trials
mv studies/simple_beam_optimization/substudies/validation_4d_3trials studies/simple_beam_optimization/2_substudies/03_validation_4d_3trials
mv studies/simple_beam_optimization/substudies/full_optimization_50trials studies/simple_beam_optimization/2_substudies/04_full_optimization_50trials
# Move reports
mv studies/simple_beam_optimization/COMPREHENSIVE_BENCHMARK_RESULTS.md studies/simple_beam_optimization/3_reports/
mv studies/simple_beam_optimization/OPTIMIZATION_RESULTS_50TRIALS.md studies/simple_beam_optimization/2_substudies/04_full_optimization_50trials/
# Clean up
rm -rf studies/simple_beam_optimization/substudies/
rm -rf studies/simple_beam_optimization/model/
```
### Option 2: Apply to Future Studies Only
Keep existing study as-is, apply new organization to future studies.
**When to Use**:
- Current study is complete and well-understood
- Reorganization would break existing scripts/references
- Want to test new organization before migrating
---
## Best Practices
### Study-Level Files
**Required**:
- `README.md` - High-level overview, purpose, design variables, objectives
- `study_metadata.json` - Metadata, status, substudy registry
- `beam_optimization_config.json` - Main configuration (inheritable)
- `run_optimization.py` - Study-specific runner script
**Optional**:
- `CHANGELOG.md` - Track configuration changes across substudies
- `LESSONS_LEARNED.md` - Engineering insights, dead ends avoided
### Substudy-Level Files
**Required** (Generated by Runner):
- `trial_XXX/` - Trial directories with CAD/FEM files and results.json
- `history.json` - Full optimization history
- `best_trial.json` - Best trial metadata
- `optuna_study.pkl` - Optuna study object
- `config.json` - Substudy-specific configuration
**Required** (User-Created):
- `README.md` - Purpose, hypothesis, parameter choices
**Optional** (Auto-Generated):
- `plots/` - Visualization plots (if post_processing.generate_plots = true)
- `cleanup_log.json` - Model cleanup statistics (if post_processing.cleanup_models = true)
**Optional** (User-Created):
- `OPTIMIZATION_RESULTS.md` - Detailed analysis and interpretation
### Trial-Level Files
**Always Kept** (Small, Critical):
- `results.json` - Extracted objectives, constraints, design variables
**Kept for Top-N Trials** (Large, Useful):
- `Beam.prt` - CAD model
- `Beam_sim1.sim` - Simulation setup
- `beam_sim1-solution_1.op2` - FEA results (binary)
- `beam_sim1-solution_1.f06` - FEA results (text)
**Cleaned for Poor Trials** (Large, Less Useful):
- All `.prt`, `.sim`, `.fem`, `.op2`, `.f06` files deleted
- Only `results.json` preserved
---
## Naming Conventions
### Substudy Names
**Format**: `NN_descriptive_name`
**Examples**:
- `01_initial_exploration` - First exploration of design space
- `02_validation_3d_3trials` - Validate 3 design variables work
- `03_validation_4d_3trials` - Validate 4 design variables work
- `04_full_optimization_50trials` - Full optimization run
- `05_refined_search_30trials` - Refined search in promising region
- `06_sensitivity_analysis` - Parameter sensitivity study
**Guidelines**:
- Start with two-digit number (01, 02, ..., 99)
- Use underscores for spaces
- Be concise but descriptive
- Include trial count if relevant
### Study Names
**Format**: `descriptive_name` (no numbering)
**Examples**:
- `simple_beam_optimization` - Optimize simple beam
- `bracket_displacement_maximizing` - Maximize bracket displacement
- `engine_mount_fatigue` - Engine mount fatigue optimization
**Guidelines**:
- Use underscores for spaces
- Include part name and optimization goal
- Avoid dates (use substudy numbering for chronology)
---
## Metadata Format
### study_metadata.json
**Recommended Format**:
```json
{
"study_name": "simple_beam_optimization",
"description": "Minimize displacement and weight of beam with existing loadcases",
"created": "2025-11-17T10:24:09.613688",
"status": "active",
"design_variables": ["beam_half_core_thickness", "beam_face_thickness", "holes_diameter", "hole_count"],
"objectives": ["minimize_displacement", "minimize_stress", "minimize_mass"],
"constraints": ["displacement_limit"],
"substudies": [
{
"name": "01_initial_exploration",
"created": "2025-11-17T10:30:00",
"status": "completed",
"trials": 10,
"purpose": "Explore design space boundaries"
},
{
"name": "02_validation_3d_3trials",
"created": "2025-11-17T11:00:00",
"status": "completed",
"trials": 3,
"purpose": "Validate 3D parameter updates (without hole_count)"
},
{
"name": "03_validation_4d_3trials",
"created": "2025-11-17T12:00:00",
"status": "completed",
"trials": 3,
"purpose": "Validate 4D parameter updates (with hole_count)"
},
{
"name": "04_full_optimization_50trials",
"created": "2025-11-17T13:00:00",
"status": "completed",
"trials": 50,
"purpose": "Full optimization with all 4 design variables"
}
],
"last_modified": "2025-11-17T15:30:00"
}
```
### Substudy README.md Template
```markdown
# [Substudy Name]
**Date**: YYYY-MM-DD
**Status**: [planned | running | completed | failed]
**Trials**: N
## Purpose
[Why this substudy was created, what hypothesis is being tested]
## Configuration Changes
[Compared to previous substudy or baseline config, what changed?]
- Design variable bounds: [if changed]
- Objective weights: [if changed]
- Sampler settings: [if changed]
## Expected Outcome
[What do you hope to learn or achieve?]
## Actual Results
[Fill in after completion]
- Best objective: X.XX
- Feasible designs: N / N_total
- Key findings: [summary]
## Next Steps
[What substudy should follow based on these results?]
```
---
## Workflow Integration
### Creating a New Substudy
**Steps**:
1. Determine substudy number (next in sequence)
2. Create substudy README.md with purpose and changes
3. Update configuration if needed
4. Run optimization:
```bash
python run_optimization.py --substudy-name "05_refined_search_30trials"
```
5. After completion:
- Review results
- Update substudy README.md with findings
- Create OPTIMIZATION_RESULTS.md if significant
- Update study_metadata.json
### Comparing Substudies
**Create Comparison Report**:
```markdown
# Substudy Comparison
| Substudy | Trials | Best Obj | Feasible | Key Finding |
|----------|--------|----------|----------|-------------|
| 01_initial_exploration | 10 | 1250.3 | 0/10 | Design space too large |
| 02_validation_3d_3trials | 3 | 1180.5 | 0/3 | 3D updates work |
| 03_validation_4d_3trials | 3 | 1120.2 | 0/3 | hole_count updates work |
| 04_full_optimization_50trials | 50 | 842.6 | 0/50 | No feasible designs found |
**Conclusion**: Constraint appears infeasible. Recommend relaxing displacement limit.
```
---
## Benefits of Proposed Organization
### For Users
1. **Clarity**: Numbered substudies show chronological progression
2. **Self-Documenting**: Each substudy explains its purpose
3. **Easy Comparison**: All results in one place (3_reports/)
4. **Less Clutter**: Study root only has essential files
### For Developers
1. **Predictable Structure**: Scripts can rely on consistent paths
2. **Automated Discovery**: Easy to find all substudies programmatically
3. **Version Control**: Clear history through numbered substudies
4. **Scalability**: Works for 5 substudies or 50
### For Collaboration
1. **Onboarding**: New team members can understand study progression quickly
2. **Documentation**: Substudy READMEs explain decisions made
3. **Reproducibility**: Clear configuration history
4. **Communication**: Easy to reference specific substudies in discussions
---
## FAQ
### Q: Should I reorganize my existing study?
**A**: Only if:
- Study is still active (more substudies planned)
- Current organization is causing confusion
- You have time to update documentation references
Otherwise, apply to future studies only.
### Q: What if my substudy doesn't have a fixed trial count?
**A**: Use descriptive name instead:
- `05_refined_search_until_feasible`
- `06_sensitivity_sweep`
- `07_validation_run`
### Q: Can I delete old substudies?
**A**: Generally no. Keep for:
- Historical record
- Lessons learned
- Reproducibility
If disk space is critical:
- Use model cleanup to delete CAD/FEM files
- Archive old substudies to external storage
- Keep metadata and results.json files
### Q: Should benchmarking be a substudy?
**A**: No. Benchmarking validates the baseline model before optimization. It belongs in `1_setup/benchmarking/`.
### Q: How do I handle multi-stage optimizations?
**A**: Create separate substudies:
- `05_stage1_meet_constraint_20trials`
- `06_stage2_minimize_mass_30trials`
Document the relationship in substudy READMEs.
---
## Summary
**Current Organization**: Functional but has room for improvement
- ✅ Substudy isolation works well
- ⚠️ Documentation scattered across levels
- ⚠️ Chronology unclear from names alone
**Proposed Organization**: Clearer hierarchy and progression
- 📁 `1_setup/` - Pre-optimization (model, benchmarking)
- 📁 `2_substudies/` - Numbered optimization runs
- 📁 `3_reports/` - Comparative analysis
**Next Steps**:
1. Decide: Reorganize existing study or apply to future only
2. If reorganizing: Follow migration guide
3. Update `study_metadata.json` with all substudies
4. Create substudy README templates
5. Document lessons learned in study-level docs
**Bottom Line**: The proposed organization makes it easier to understand what was done, why it was done, and what was learned.